The Andy Kindler Hub

[Itslikeimsayin]

I'm all for people being called out if needed, but I think Andy got several things wrong and the whole thing came across as being envious of LCK's newfound fame. First of all, as far as I know, Louis has never said that HBO didn't let him make Lucky Louie how he wanted to make it. In fact, he's said that they allowed him to make the exact show he wanted to make. His disappointment, from what I know, came from HBO's unwillingness to give the show some rope and grow in a second season. Even then, though, Louis was always very grateful toward HBO, so I don't know where Andy got this idea.

The other item that baffles me is Andy taking issue with whether or not the reading glasses/masturbation story actually happened. Who cares? That line about if LCK can "swear to me in a court of law that's what happened" is so bizarre. Since when does comedy have to be something that actually happened? It's the idea that matters, not the reality of the situation, isn't it?

I love Andy Kindler but this whole thing just feels like an attention grab by unexpectedly going after the big fish. Maybe it's so rare that critically acclaimed (read: "good") projects also become among the most popular in any genre, Andy didn't know how to handle this. In any case, I'm sure there are many better targets out there than Louis.

[Adult Ed]

The masturbation-glasses critique is that if you are telling a pretend story you are being crude for the cheap laughs of being crude; it was part of a larger critique of Louis' comedy. His broader take on it was that the best of Louis' standup is pure genius but there is a solid percentage that nobody acknowledges is cheap throwaway crap. There is no doubt that (a) Louis is a genius and (b) he pantomimes jerking off a hell of a lot.

As for Lucky Louie, Kindler said that it was bad. Just bad. I didn't watch enough to form an opinion about the show. I only saw (and didn't love) the first two episodes - I canceled HBO for financial reasons literally in the middle of the run - but I was told that the show improved from episode to episode and then got killed. The idea that "recreating an old sitcom" format was something worthwhile was something else he considered bad. Just write a funny show; the Honeymooners looked like that because they had no choice. Why would you intentionally imitate a stale format unless you are being a bit up your own asshole about form?

To think of this as an attention grab is just so overprotective of a guy you like. It's cool to like Louis but there's no reason to lash out at the guy saying that maybe he doesn't deserve to be treated as above criticism just because it is fashionable to fellate him.

Also, he is correct that Louie usually isn't particularly funny. I've been saying that since early in season one. I think it is a great show even though it isn't funny but I don't care that Kindler doesn't find it funny OR all that great.

[Dogwelder]

I'm all for people being called out if needed, but I think Andy got several things wrong and the whole thing came across as being envious of LCK's newfound fame. First of all, as far as I know, Louis has never said that HBO didn't let him make Lucky Louie how he wanted to make it. In fact, he's said that they allowed him to make the exact show he wanted to make. His disappointment, from what I know, came from HBO's unwillingness to give the show some rope and grow in a second season. Even then, though, Louis was always very grateful toward HBO, so I don't know where Andy got this idea.

I believe Andy may have gotten this from a few things Louis has said about the production of Lucky Louis and the fact that he didn't stick with his gut and allowed himself to be swayed to going more with industry standards. Everyone around him insisted having a writer's room and things like that is just how you make TV, so he went with it but feels like the show ended up being less unique because of it. Which is why he demanded so much control this time.

The other item that baffles me is Andy taking issue with whether or not the reading glasses/masturbation story actually happened. Who cares? That line about if LCK can "swear to me in a court of law that's what happened" is so bizarre. Since when does comedy have to be something that actually happened? It's the idea that matters, not the reality of the situation, isn't it?

I'm pretty sure in his rushed, Andy Kindler style take-down of this joke, what he was implying is that (in Andy's opinion) it is a hacky joke, so the only excuse Louis might have is if the woman actually said it, which she obviously didn't because no person would say that.

I love Andy. I love Louis. That is all.

Edit: Beaten. Sort of.

[Itslikeimsayin]

To think of this as an attention grab is just so overprotective of a guy you like. It's cool to like Louis but there's no reason to lash out at the guy saying that maybe he doesn't deserve to be treated as above criticism just because it is fashionable to fellate him.

I wouldn't have said it if Andy's criticisms made sense to me (or at least were grounded in fact). Look who started this thread. I'm a huge fan of Andy Kindler, but this felt forced or contrived in a way.

[nathansmart]

Since we're talking facts here, let's all give it up for the true Andy Kindler Hub starter.

ME, BABY, ME

[Itslikeimsayin]

Prove it! :-)

[metal2000]

I love Louis, and didn't necessarily find anything to agree with in Kindler's Louis rant at JFL, but damn did it have me in stitches anyway. The whole room, in fact.

He does a ranting, about-to-overheat anti-Louis robot really well. It just kept going and going, and the ridiculousness of the entire situation made me laugh. If he had just straight-ahead said all those criticisms without the character/bit behind it, in that over-the-top way, I don't think it would've been very effective comedically or critically. I still personally didn't find it effective critically (I disagree with almost everything in the rant). But who cares? He got laughs and got some shit off his chest.

Also, no recording was allowed in there. I *did* try to get an audio recording, but I don't know how to use my new recorder well enough, I guess, since I stopped it instead of started it when Adomian was introducing him (as Kindler). Whoops!

[Umlaut]

I don't feel the criticisms of Louis as pretentious are fair. He's always been a film nerd; particularly short film. I remember him hosting ShortCuts on PBS featuring indie filmmakers. Him doing all this stuff with Woody Allen's people and getting more into really great film work is just the logical conclusion. I mean, maybe he's not a film nerd but I can remember him talking a lot about film back in those days when I got his Short Films DVD.

Sorry, to clarify, Andy called the show Louie pretentious, not the person. I can see how somebody could find the show at times pretentious, though I do not feel this way myself. A pretentious show's second season premiere wouldn't be a 21 minute set-up to a fart joke.

[nathansmart]

But he also talked about him going on about film and stuff.

Didn't he?

[Couldn'tThinkOfaName]

There's some good points about the media treatment of whoever's the hot ticket of the moment, making impossibly definitive 'best of' statements. Everything else was sactimonious and forced false premises because it's Andy's shtick to be angry at whoever is popular at any given moment. It was interesting how he has softened on Dane Cook recently, mainly because there's no real currency is criticising him anymore. Some of the more personal stuff was harsh and pretty unfair to me.

And pretentiousness isn't a valid criticism of anything.

...and a third criticism.

[Monty]

Sorry, to clarify, Andy called the show Louie pretentious, not the person. I can see how somebody could find the show at times pretentious, though I do not feel this way myself. A pretentious show's second season premiere wouldn't be a 21 minute set-up to a fart joke.

I think it's pretentious in a good way. It aspires to something better than whatever this television show would normally be. I believe that Mr. CK consciously sets himself higher goals. I approve of that sort of pretension. Why should everything have to just accept what it is?

[Ghost Dad]

I know a guy who has the 2012 state of the industry mp3, and I'm getting to hear it soon. I will listen to it and then delineate who is right and wrong in this thread.

edit: NO PMs please. He might put it online in a year, I'll letcha know.

edit2: yes, I guess I am showing off :P

[pixel revolt]

It's OK, Ghost Dad. You can forward my mp3 to anyone who asks.

Also are we still on for Chik-Fil-A on Friday? I've been craving it all week!!!

[Ghost Dad]

I bet that's not the only thing you've been craving!! *wolf whistle*


Besides, I lied, it's an m4a on laserdisc

[aenemaTron]

I asked Andy Kindler a long time ago about the SOTI things and he said he records them and at that time he wanted to do something with them but this was pretty much Classical Music Times so who knows now.

As far as Louis CK goes, I'm already in a one-sided inactive secret feud with Andy over his intolerance of intolerant atheists so we're in major back-burner territory right now.

Meanwhile waiting for I Wish I Was Sweet, I Wish I Was Sour, I Wish I Was Salty and I Wish I Knew What Umami Is.

[paperboy2000]

Does anyone else here think that Kindler continuing to do the SOTI speeches is a bit of a "hacky" endeavour in itself? Sure, we don't like Leno or Dane Cook or Robin or Sandler movies (or maybe some of us do), but regardless--- what's the point of Kindler going up and knocking these targets every year? It feels like he does it because that's a big niche he has carved out for himself and what people are expecting of him, and to that extent it feels as pandering as any bad Sandler movie or Leno's weekly "headlines."
Also, the CK stuff. Why is Kindler critiquing specific jokes of his act? (The masturbation bit on that Laughspin interview.) I mean, could we parse through every bit of Andy Kindler's to find truthful, innovative hilarity in each joke? I just don't see the point in him doing that, and it does come off as bitter. Or at least, it comes off as snarky blogger rather than fellow comedian.
His criticisms about CK's ego—well I assume that's just how the media re-uses reliable memes ("He throws his material out every year!" "He's the best comedian today!") and not because CK is actually an egotistical dick. As for CK discussing production facts about his show (i.e. the helicopter cost),— CK is a filmmaker and interested in that type of minutia, as are lots of film buffs who enjoy such information. It doesn't feel like bragging as much as it is just relating interesting facts.
Anyway, my main question is: Why does a comedian feel the desire to be positioned as the "judge of the comedy landscape"? Also, I'll read things about Kindler's SOTI speeches that say "wow, this takes a lot of balls!" whereas I think it's the opposite: how does it take balls to A) Do the thing that everyone is expecting you to do, and B) Take shots at people he admits "aren't gonna book me anyway"

PS: I'm a big fan of this board and I realize Kindler is much beloved here. Not at all trying to flame anything. Just wanted to express my thoughts on the subject. I realize the whole SOTI is a big comedy bit, and the individual jokes are funny--- I just feel like it also has an "icky" quality to it.

[funnyclown]

I agree with a lot of Andy's observations, but not his conclusion. The needing reading glasses to jerk off joke bummed me out, too, and the forced vulgarity rarely moves me at all at this point. And just watching that horrible Gervais/Rock/Seinfeld/CK summit made me realize exactly how brilliant Louie thinks he is. The problem is, , though, he IS brilliant. He's on an amazing, amazing roll with standup, and bored as I might be with some of his crutches, and as much as I keep being afraid I'm going to be disappointed, I don't feel like there's been any drop-off in the quality of his specials, which I find incredible. He's produced a staggering amount of top quality material. Yes, there's shit in there, and yeah, the TV show is only occasionally great, but when it hits, what else comes close to how good it is? You can't just judge a thing by its flaws.

The one point Andy made that I didn't even get was complaining about Louie doing a new hour every year. I don't understand how wanting to work hard is a bad thing. Also, I'm very much on Andy's page politically, but I wasn't upset that Louie didn't ruin his joke by turning the punchline into simply screaming about how George W. Bush is a war criminal.

Anyway, I love both of these guys, I admire Andy's misguided bravery, and I can only hope this has not ruined comedy forever.

[andykindler]

Where am I? What is this? How long was I out for? Somebody really nailed me on this thread. After 28 years of standup, I obviously became so desperate I convinced myself to say stuff I really didn't mean as an "attention grab." In fact, I love the show Louie unconditionally. And I see Louis CK as my mentor and a prophet and a third thing. But I had to go after him all because of this "attention grab" business I got mixed up with.

[andykindler]

I was in the room when I gave the speech. Also I'm completely unbiased. From my God-like vantage point, Metal2000 has summed up how it "went down." Sure his conclusions differ from mine and are therefore null and void. And I object to his screen name. I would prefer Newwave1983. But many people were laughing because of the performance regardless of their opinion. "Many People Were Laughing" will be the name of my autobiography.

[andykindler]

Me again. This is fun. Hey powers that be. I'm not 61 years old. It's bad enough that I'm ___ years old. Maybe I'm 61 years old in complaining years, but I know my birthday. I have a long form birth certificate and everything. Your fascist system won't let me change the date on my profile. What kind of racket are you guys running here? Someone with Klout needs to change this ASAP or AARP.